Talk:Halo: Reach
Page locked again, happy now? About time, my fellow administrators, you locked this page. But however, I would like to point out that come August, Bungie has warned us that, that month would feature alot of more new Halo coverage, mostly concerning the Campaign I guess. So whether or not the article would be back to "Registered users only" protection, it's up to you guys. I rather lean towards the "Admins Only" protection, as Halopedia has way too many idiotic 11 year old editors who can't type even the simplest form of correct grammatic English. So no offense here. Because I am sick and tired of these people who cannot do a proper edit, thus prompting this article to "Admins only" protection levels for about countless times, and even long-time non-admin editors like me and other more educated and/or civilized, mature non-admin editors are unfortunately unable to edit because of those morons in our community. Sigh, I wish there would be another protection level in-between "Registered Users only" and "Admins only", which would be Rollback Rights Users only, since we non-admins have proven ourselves worthy of gaining the ability to rollback edits. And Nah, I am too lazy to make a blog about this. :P Dark Neptune 04:40, July 28, 2010 (UTC) :halo reach,well let's see threre are missle warthog the falcon, spartan threes and some other cool shit halo rech is awsomeCanihazreconz.1 09:30, July 28, 2010 (UTC) ::Good Job Canihazreconz, you just made yourself look like the type of person who lead to the lock, with your crappy grammar, spelling and your posting in the wrong section, plus it's SPARTAN III or Spartan III, not spartan three, dud. LiLLiPaDDy ~True tears are never seen, only hidden~ 10:32, July 28, 2010 (UTC) :::Nah, it was all EchostreamFanJosh's fault - starting an edit war where he disregarded administration intervention and continued. Apparently, Firefight appearances don't count as game appearances because Firefight isn't part of the campaign. Notice that "game appearances" means "appearances in general". That's also why we had Col. Holland in - he was in the promotional stuff.-- Forerunner 13:50, July 28, 2010 (UTC) :::When will it be unlocked? (If at all) [[User:FatalSnipe117|'Que']] , [[User talk:FatalSnipe117|'Sera']] 15:20, July 28, 2010 (UTC) ::::As of now...August 2nd. That is, if the others can learn to control themselves. :::::Thanks for edit conflicting me >.< Yeah, 2 August. Just after 4PM in GMT. Considering that the page's protect log is pretty big and only just got off the protect list when it was re-locked... they're not going to control themselves. We're only keeping the lock-down times low because there's some important Halo: Reach stuff in August. -- Forerunner 15:36, July 28, 2010 (UTC) ::::::The history of Halo: Reach's protection log is terrible. -- To be honest, it was everyone's fault, the Administration, the veteran users, the "normal-ies", and the new editors. Nobody dare pin this on any one person as it seems like none of you could come to an agreement or compromise over the past week concerning these matters. With the "Firefight only" template, that's doing quite a lot of assuming on the people who proposed this tag, though while logical, is baseless as we don't know of their inclusion in the campaign as of yet. Any "firefight only" tag added onto the page will be removed on that base alone until the launch of Halo: Reach has occurred. And if your wondering why this page is locked so much, it's because users with normal access don't take the correct steps to ensure that your younger colleagues who are new to editing aren't making mistakes every single day. The Administration cannot be responsible for every single edit made on this wiki, therefore we rely on seasoned editors such as the ones who've posted above to sort these guys out. This article will remained locked until my colleagues or myself feel as if your capable of being civilized editors and listen to what the Administration has to say on this matter. DO NOT go rogue on this article and assume what your doing is the correct thing to do or at best, assume that you know what the hell your doing. This conversation is over, have a good day ya'll! Rawr, Sources broken Am I the only one who sees a bunch of broken sources on the page right now? -- SFH 00:43, August 2, 2010 (UTC) :They're not broken. It's an error thst appears on this page every now and then. Tags cease to function. I assume that you also see the infobox cut up, too.-- Forerunner 01:06, August 2, 2010 (UTC) ::Yeah. So, no worries, then? -- SFH 03:18, August 2, 2010 (UTC) New level names revealed? The YouTube video "Halo: Reach - names of certains missions revealed" shows an apparent campaign loading screen from ComicCon. The first six levels are listed below: #Training #Winter Contingency #Dark Rain #The Death Before the Victory #Long Night of Solace (the achievement for level 6 must be related to the new scene added onto the campaign trailer which shows a Covensnt ship being fired upon from the ground) #Suspect Behaviour - yes, with a 'U' The remaing levels do not appear, so I guess haven't been unlocked by player 1.-- Forerunner 06:57, August 2, 2010 (UTC) :It's more than likely a fake. "CaLL Me ZeNy" is known for his absurdly fake, though quality, game menu videos. Take these names with a virus-laden grain of salt. ::Possible. Could you check the video out? I can't get the HTML on my iPod.-- Forerunner 07:18, August 2, 2010 (UTC) :::Ah, I found a link - see here. YouTube marks it as a new video, so it could be from ComicCon. Furthermore, the lack of a 'Mission 1' achievement fits in with the level 'Training'. If it is a fake, this guy began making it just after Friday's BWU.-- Forerunner 07:24, August 2, 2010 (UTC) ::::In the future, please supply a proper direct link to the video. Anyway, looking at the video... it's too good to be true. The Youtube video looks too perfect/clean, as if it was taken from a capture-card device. By reading off the comments of the video, one can see that it is indeed fake. - 5əb'7aŋk(7alk) 11:09, August 2, 2010 (UTC) ::::Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's fake. The menus in the game are different from the placeholder ones at Comic-Con, meaning he can't have gotten the footage there. And even at that, that footage is captured directly from the source. There's no way he could have gotten away with that with the hundreds of people around him. - [[User:Halo-343|'Halo-343']] [[User talk:Halo-343|(Talk)]] 11:03, August 2, 2010 (UTC) :::::This is an excerpt from BWU 7/16/10, in which Chris Opdahl, Reach's Campaign Design Lead, discusses missions in the game: "That said, here are some of the acronyms that are likely to show up in a lot of people's favorites:: TotS, LNoS, Ex, NA, LW (and another that would give away too much if I acronym-ized the title)." I see Long Night of Solace, but none of the other abbreviations match what the video tells us. Here's another thing, which Forerunner pointed out. Why would Bungie, an American company, spell behavior as "behaviour" - the Commonwealth spelling? Fake!!! --"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have." -Thomas Jefferson 16:59, August 2, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Confirmed fake. Third fourth and fifth missions are Nightfall, Tip of the Spear and Long Night of Solace respectively. -- The Storm 59 11:56, August 4, 2010 (UTC) Mission order. Current known mission order: 1. Winter Contingency 2. ???????? 3. Nightfall 4. Tip of the Spear 5. Long Night of Solace This is mainly speculation, but I have a feeling that Winter Contingency is actually "mission two". It seems strange to me to have released information regarding mission 1, 3, 4 and 5 unless spoilers occur in mission two, which I just can't see happening so early in the game. I would guess that Winter Contingency is actually mission two, and that mission one is something small which just puts the player through his paces. Once again, this is just speculation. ---The Storm 59 12:00, August 4, 2010 (UTC) : And obviously The Fall of Reach will be last, since that is probably what the guy meant by "Giving away too much if he abbreviated it" in a Bungie Weekly update, and really, it's kinda obvious. LiLLiPaDDy ~True tears are never seen, only hidden~ 13:51, August 4, 2010 (UTC) :: Not neccesarilly. Why wouldn't he give that away; we already know Reach will fall. [[User:FatalSnipe117|'Que']] , [[User talk:FatalSnipe117|'Sera']] 22:13, August 4, 2010 (UTC) ::: WC must be the second level because in the description on the page it says to find what blocking communications. This usually occurs when the previous level at the end, there was another problem. The first mission's ending should have someone trying to communicate 'someone' however the signal is being blocked. :::: It is stated in an article (dont have the source right now, but will link asap), that winter contingency is the first mission, and that nightfall is the third. Apparantly something happens in the seccond mission bungie didn't want to reveal yet. Be back in a seccond with a link. :::: Found it! That didn't take long! Game Reactor article; First Look: Halo Reach: ::::"Finally I got to see a small part of a night level. Apparently the third level, as I was first given a glimpse of level one+. Something drastic happens during the second level and Bungie did not want to spoil anything. During the night level I got to see another new feature in Halo: Reach, as you can now pimp your armour." +Level one refers to Winter Contingency. :::: So now we know that we havent seen the seccond mission. --The Storm 59 10:03, August 5, 2010 (UTC) :::: :::: As seen on IGN here, the seccond mission of the game occurs in Courtyard and Swordbase: Courtyard is the courtyard of Swordbase. As we know, this is an ONI site, so I can see the potential for spoilers. Im predicting some kind of fun reference. Meeting the cheif? Meeting Halsey? -- The Storm 59 01:42, August 6, 2010 (UTC) :::: :::: Maybe the initials for the level that would give too much away are CH. any halo fan who's read the books knows what that stands for! [[User:FatalSnipe117|'Que']] , [[User talk:FatalSnipe117|'Sera']] 02:05, August 6, 2010 (UTC) My Negosiation(I don't know how to spell it) about this. User:Michaeldragon800 -- I'm sorry for rushing the infomation that i added. So i'm asking you admins some personmission and opinion about this. There's no infomation about how the Elites play in Reach Multiplayer luckly i have the right infomation about this. I think that even though you admins like to refer these weapons by thier real names and not thier notable names. How about this, Next to thier real names i can put thier notable names next to it, Like for example... * Type-31 Rifle/Needle Rifle That way some people can understand what weapons they are if they can't understand thier real names. Hey don't you dare remove this section! I want opinions from the admins, Not somebody removing this section, They must hear this. :I do agree on not removing the comment. It's an article talk page - your comment was about the article, and therefore should stay to be responded to. Regardless of spelling/grammar etc, it's still a legitimate comment. :The Technical/Nickname convention has been discussed before, and I think it's disappointing that we would need to. We include a link to the article so that people can know what the names mean. Appealing to the lowest denominator feels like a cop-out - we should be raising people's standards, not lowering our own. That's just my own opinion - having both the technical and the colloquial names may clear up some confusion, even if they make us look more like a game walkthrough than a wiki, but that's not my choice and I leave it to better men and women than I to decide. :For the information about the Elites - if it has to be noted at all, then it should just be a very brief statement that Elites differ from Spartans for gameplay balance purposes. Further details can be outlined on the Sangheili/Gameplay article - where, you will notice, it already is. It's just too irrelevant to the main body of text to be included. :And as for demanding that nobody remove the text you added to the article - all wiki's are open-source, available for anyone to edit, for better or for worse. The disclaimer under the edit box tells you "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here." :And, because you yourself note you had trouble with the spelling, it's "Negotiation." With a "T". -- Specops306 Autocrat Qur'a 'Morhek 13:27, August 6, 2010 (UTC) :If you get confused about what a weapon is you can just click the link and read the article anyway. It would be nice to have both names, but incredibly messy. My insight is that I understand why to name an article by its cannon name but when linking to an article, and especially from a gameplay related section such as a game article, you might as well have the weapon named as it is in game. :Regarding the section you added about elites, pretty much what Specops306 said. That and the grammar of your contribution was pretty atrocious. It was valid, but not up to par with the rest of the encyclopedia. Sorry! -- The Storm 59 14:20, August 6, 2010 (UTC) :It has to go to the Sangheili/Gameplay article. -- Timeline pictures I know Reach is the newest game in terms of release, but is chronologically the second game (Including Halo Wars), therefore, the weapons and vehicles in the game aren't the latest models. Shouldn't we have the Halo 3/Halo 3: ODST models, as they are the latest models? I'm not saying we remove the Reach pictures completly, just that it would be reasonable to note something like "The plasma pistol varient/model used during the Fall of Reach". Turbogruntman117 14:43, August 6, 2010 (UTC) :I've wondered about this too. A lot of the technology we know is somewhat outdated by the time of Halo3, which on this wiki feels like it is treated as the present, since it is the farthest along in canon(with the exception of The Return). As a secondary note, we also know that a lot of Covenant has undergone stylization in order to make them "more terrifying" and it may or may not reflect their actual image. So if Halo 3 is treated as the present, then the main article picture, I feel, should be of those variants, not the Reach models, with the exception, say, things like the Plasma Pistol, where the two are close enough in design that we might as well go with the more detailed Reach image. For something like Brutes instead, then change them back.[[User:Tuckerscreator|''Tuckerscreator]]'' 21:16, August 8, 2010 (UTC)'' Minor visual alterations such as the height of Sangheili should not be taken as canon - those are stylisations so that when you play as Thel, you're not shorter (while the character mesh is different, the player base model is the same). Halo: Reach images should be given the same usage freedom as Halo 3 images, unless something in it is different from November 2552, which I cannot currently give an example other than the already explained Jiralhanae armour differences.-- Forerunner 22:59, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :ODST used all the models from Halo 3 even though it was current with Halo 2. I think that the Reach pictures should be used...it's kind of like, that's what the stuff was always meant to be. The'yre the highest quality images Bungie's been able to produce. I don't think the Elites and everyone suddenly stopped using all their awesome armor and stuff the week after Reach on Halo. I think we're supposed to accept this as what the Covenant and UNSC always should have looked like. Flayer92 21:09, August 19, 2010 (UTC) In the case of ODST, though, it was updates to the canon, not sylization. By that point, the Elites, Grunt, and Brute armor did not look that they did in Halo 3 during Halo 3.[[User:Tuckerscreator|Tuckerscreator]] 21:43, August 19, 2010 (UTC) Max players I heard the max players were increased to 24? Dunno, its not discussed anywhere on here. --Halofighter92 04:21, August 16, 2010 (UTC) I havent heard that but i would be happy if it were true. A truly "big" team battle playlist.--FATGUNN 05:53, August 16, 2010 (UTC) Because with Bungie's talks of having more objects, NPC's and such on screen at such resolution, upping the player count is entirely plausible. It's nothing they never denied, either. Just a thought worth looking into. --Halofighter92 06:46, August 16, 2010 (UTC) Patrol Is there any reason the new Patrol trailer isn't mentioned on the page or has it simply not been added yet?--Soul reaper 12:13, August 17, 2010 (UTC) :Done.- 5əb'7aŋk(7alk) 12:21, August 17, 2010 (UTC) VISR Mode Confirmed In a recent gameplay video that was recorded from Gamescon, the player activiates VISR mode at around 7:46 of this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK78TvPQPyM 21:51, August 18, 2010 (UTC) That's actually Nightvision. Missing Mandible 01:41, August 19, 2010 (UTC) It's actually VISR. 07:07, August 19, 2010 (UTC) :It's night vision, it was confirmed months ago. It has similar properties to VISR, but it's night vision, replacing the flashlight. - [[User:Halo-343|'Halo-343']] [[User talk:Halo-343|('Talk')]] 21:25, August 19, 2010 (UTC) UV chest Some one needs to edit the part where it says gamestop only because GAME has it as a bonus as well 00:33 GMT -- 23:33, August 14, 2010 (UTC) New Campaign Mission Order It seems to me that with the addition of Noble Actual to the wiki as the first mission in Reach, things have gotten a little bit confused. Noble was added as the first mission and Winter Contingency then changed from first to second. So far everything is going all right. Next Nightfall, listed as the third at the time, was updated to list the previous mission as Winter Contingency, and winter Contingency to list Nightfall as the next mission. This is wrong. So wrong. The Correct mission order as we know it thus far goes as so: #. Noble Actual #. Winter Contingency #. ???????? #. Nightfall #. Tip of the Spear #. Long Night of Solace How do I know that we haven't seen the third mission yet? Well it gets a little confusing, so if you trust me, probably best to leave it like that. For those who want to try to prove me wrong... I'll provide my sources, but I can't guarantee they will be in an easy to read, legible fashion. For a good gist of why, just see the old mission order about halfway up this page for reasoning. For a better idea, read below. The problem is that various sources list missions as different numbered missions. The true mission order is what I listed above, but in some cases Winter Contingency has been stated as the first mission as it is the first '''Playable' mission. This is where alot of confusion has come from. I have sources about why we haven't seen the third campaign mission yet. You need to stick with me however, because the sources have made the mixup I just talked about. My first source is a GameReactor.eu article from January - First Look: Halo Reach. :Jonas Mäki (the writer) begins by describing a level he is allowed to preview. From what we have been told by various other sites, it is easy to conclude that this is Winter Contingency. ::"Reach is a dead planet. All its 700 million inhabitants are dead. They just don't know it yet. A distant radar station stops working. Reach separatists are thought to be responsible and a UNSC team is sent to investigate. A routine mission, but all communications are lost with the team. ::"UNSC reacts by sending a team of Spartan III soldiers, Noble Team, to deal with the rebels. You are one of these soldiers. A young lieutenant with limited experience, who joins the mission as a replacement. At the scene there is an uneasy atmosphere of calm. Everything is deserted. There are plenty of settlements from the time when pioneers settled on Reach about 100 years ago. Cut into the rocks in order to withstand the harsh climate of Reach. ::"Everyone is gone. Dead. No signs of life. Something terrible has happened here. It's more than just an angry group of separatist, whose only wish is that UNSC leave their planet alone. This is when the battle begins. It's intense, it's hard to see the enemy as they bounce between walls, jump off roofs and run up the streets." :Much later in the article Mäki is allowed to preview another level. From what we know we can easily determine that this mission is Nightfall. ::"Finally I got to see a small part of a night level. Apparently the third level, as I was first given a glimpse of level one. Something drastic happens during the second level and Bungie did not want to spoil anything." Now, taking into account the inconsistency with level numbering, we are still left with a gap in between these missions. Unfortunate. Right? :Time for a quick recap. :1. Noble Actual : Introductory mission consisting entirely of unplayable cinematics. :2. Winter Contingency : The first playable mission. Known to follow Noble Actual. Spartans investigate suspected insurrectionist activities. :3. :4. Nightfall : Shown above to be the fourth mission. Spartans do some night shit. Word. :5. Tip of the Spear : Known to be the fifth mission simply as it is known to follow Nightfall (I beleive it was revealed in an IGN article, but I'm unsure and unwilling to look for this now as it hardly matters - you trust me right?). Vehicular carnage. :6. Long Night Of Solace : Was known as the fifth mission in the campaign (bungie?), now pushed back to sixth place. Spartans take the fight to orbit. Follow me? It gets better. What happens in the third mission that might spoil something...? Well I don't know. But I can tell you that the third mission takes place in Courtyard, and presumably Swordbase.Carney has the details at about 3:00. Note that he makes the same mistake as Mäki and countless other reporters. Probably just easier for the developers to think this way because, naturally, Noble Actual would have had no mission designer to speak of. So... What we need to do is make sure that this mission order is maintained and that all related achievements are listed as completing the correct mission. Discuss. -- The Storm 59 14:40, August 19, 2010 (UTC) :I don't understand why we need to discuss about this... just wait for the game to be released... >.> It skips all the arguing and problems.- 5əb'7aŋk(7alk) 14:48, August 19, 2010 (UTC) ::He has a point though. The level order can be changed, IMO. Nightfall isn't the third level, but it's the third playable mission. Changing it is fine by me. --Jugus (Talk | ) 14:51, August 19, 2010 (UTC) :::As long as we don't get into any fighting, it's fine by me...- 5əb'7aŋk(7alk) 14:53, August 19, 2010 (UTC) ::::Anything we fix now we don't have to deal with fixing when Reach is released and a bunch of new/unregistered people come and edit things. This way, we can be sure that we have at least a few articles down as a good basis for other people to compare with. Also its good to be concise and accurate, even if the game hasn't been released. ::::And by the way! We can fight if we want to! More like subSINK! ha ha ha ha! =P ::::Yeah...-- The Storm 59 15:22, August 19, 2010 (UTC) Brutes and Elites Do they fight alongside each other in this game? They're hate each other, and the only time we know they fought on equal terms was during the Battle of Skopje. EtErNiTy92 Revolution! 01:28, August 20, 2010 (UTC) :This is before the Schism - there's no reason why they wouldn't work together. They may not be happy about it, but at this point in time they're allies. -- Specops306 Autocrat Qur'a 'Morhek 02:48, August 20, 2010 (UTC) Can FF maps be played as the rest of MP maps? Just askin'